Re: Towards a new LPPL draft
Jeremy Hankins <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Jeff Licquia <email@example.com> writes:
> > OK. Now I'd like to hear the Debian side. Here are the conditions for
> > modification that are being proposed as I understand them:
> > - you must rename all modified files, or
> > - you must rename the whole of LaTeX in your modified copy AND
> > distribute a pristine copy of LaTeX as well.
> > Comments? Branden, Walter, Mark, and Jeremy, I'm especially interested
> > in your opinions, since you three are the current objectors.
> Yikes. I'd accept the former as free before the latter, personally.
> Giving users options is one thing, but option two seems to suggest
> that if Latex is forked for some reason we'll need to ferry around the
> original (from the date of the fork) version of latex whenever
> distributing the new version, forever. That's a far more onerous
> requirement than file renaming, imho.
This is specifically allowed by DFSG #4. The Q Public License uses
this feature as well. If you don't like it, feel free to call a
General Resolution to change it. Until then, it is still part of the
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com